PDA

View Full Version : More College Football Fun



David G
11-19-2009, 03:01 AM
WHAT CONFERENCE RACE ARE YOU FOLLOWING?

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/stewart_mandel/11/18/pac-10/index.html

Tobago
11-19-2009, 02:16 PM
Big 10.

Michigan State Alumni

Excelsior,
Ted

David G
11-22-2009, 02:37 AM
Oregon Ducks poised for Pac-10 title --


Masoli, Oregon show moxie

Tom Dienhart
Rivals.com College Football Senior Writer
TUCSON, ARIZ. - Oregon (http://oregon.rivals.com/) quarterback Jeremiah Masoli (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/cviewplayer.asp?Player=401663) spins, he stutter-steps, he jukes, he chucks the ball. Touchdown!
Masoli is the master of improvisation, time and again pulling plays out of thin air. Saturday night, he helped the Ducks make their greatest escape yet this season and kept them chugging toward a Rose Bowl showdown with Ohio State (http://ohiostate.rivals.com/).
http://vmedia.rivals.com/IMAGES/Player/video/112109-ORJAREMASOLI_250.JPGhttp://vmedia.rivals.com/images/spacer1.gifhttp://vmedia.rivals.com/images/spacer1.gifJeremiah Masoli passed for three TDs and rushed for three more - including the game-winner. "He's just incredible," Oregon running back LaMichael James (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/cviewplayer.asp?Player=401660) said. "He never got down out there, even after a couple fumbles and interceptions. He just stayed poised and led us to the win."
"The win" was a 44-41 double-overtime thriller over Arizona (http://arizona.rivals.com/) that kept the Ducks in the hunt to win the Pac-10 and play in the Rose Bowl for the first time since the 1994 season.
"I've been in double-overtimes, triple-overtimes -- that's why I didn't flinch. Our guys don't flinch," said Oregon coach Chip Kelly (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=1972), whose team has scored at least 40 points in seven of its eight Pac-10 games, including each of its past five. "We've been in this situation before. We practice overtime situations, so it wasn't a big deal."
Oregon plays host to archrival Oregon State (http://oregonstate.rivals.com/) on Dec. 3 in their annual "Civil War" showdown. There will be added incentive this season: The winner goes to the Rose Bowl, where Oregon State hasn't been since the 1964 season.
The Beavers could have advanced to Pasadena last season with a win over Oregon, but they got crushed 65-38.
As for Arizona, it will remain the only Pac-10 team to never have played in the "Granddaddy of Them All." And after this crushing loss, the students clad in red may feel like they will be grandparents before it ever happens.
USC (http://usc.rivals.com/) had won outright or shared the past seven Pac-10 titles. That dominance made the Pac-10 look like a one-trick-pony league. It has been a wide-open race this season, and it's no coincidence that numerous national observers are saying the Pac-10, top to bottom, is the best league in the nation. At the least, most say it's the second-best, behind the SEC.
Along with the fresh start this season, the league looks wide open in the future. USC isn't going anywhere. Stanford (http://stanford.rivals.com/) and Arizona are on the rise. California (http://cal.rivals.com/), Oregon and Oregon State will remain formidable. And Washington (http://washington.rivals.com/) and UCLA (http://ucla.rivals.com/) can be expected to get better under Steve Sarkisian (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=396) and Rick Neuheisel (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=2134), respectively.
http://vmedia.rivals.com/images/spacer1.gifhttp://vmedia.rivals.com/IMAGES/Coach/PHOTO/112109-ORCHIPKELLY_250.JPGhttp://vmedia.rivals.com/images/spacer1.gifChip Kelly's Ducks face Oregon State for the Pac-10 title.Masoli's performance Saturday night has the Ducks (9-2) in great position to head to Pasadena. Oregon trailed 24-14 early in the fourth quarter, and that's when Masoli went to work. He ran for a 1-yard score, then engineered a drive that resulted in a field goal. Still, Oregon trailed 31-24. But Masoli was about to have his best moment yet, deftly leading the Ducks on a 15-play, 80-yard drive that ended with a game-tying touchdown pass with six seconds left to make it 31-31.
"They've got a very good quarterback, and that is definitely what makes the difference," Arizona coach Mike Stoops (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/viewcoach.asp?Coach=509) said. "We just couldn't stop them in the fourth quarter."
Both teams scored touchdowns in the first overtime. In the second, Arizona (6-4) kicked a field goal, but the Ducks answered with a game-winning touchdown scored by Masoli on a 1-yard run.
Masoli was 26 of 45 passing for 283 yards, with three touchdowns and an interception. He also ran 16 times for 62 yards and three scores. That offset the great effort by Arizona quarterback Nick Foles (http://collegefootball.rivals.com/cviewplayer.asp?Player=409038), who completed 30 of 48 passes for 311 yards, with four touchdowns and an interception.
"We fell behind out there, but we just fought back and didn't quit at all," James said.
Because of that, Oregon has a chance to be the king in the new-look Pac-10.

Tom Dienhart is the national senior writer for Rivals.com. He can be reached at dienhart@yahoo-inc.com.


http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/11/21/snaps-week12/index.html


http://blog.oregonlive.com/pac10/2009/11/pac-10_insider_oregons_comebac.html


One of the best college games I've watched in a long time (helped, of course, by the fact that my Ducks won <G>)

Now... if we can just handle #20 Oregon State!

Cheers,

Paul Pless
11-22-2009, 06:19 AM
WHAT CONFERENCE RACE ARE YOU FOLLOWING?SEC... duh:p

Paul Pless
11-22-2009, 06:30 AM
I have another football question for ya.... fair or not should Michigan fire Rich Rodriguez right now after just two years and grab Jim Harbaugh?

SMARTINSEN
11-22-2009, 08:11 AM
Big time college football plays fair?

Beowolf
11-22-2009, 08:20 AM
Big 10.

Michigan State Alumni

Excelsior,
Ted

Same here! ('96)

http://i296.photobucket.com/albums/mm187/dlevarse/greg_jones_AP.jpg
Greg Jones...He's very good!

David G
11-22-2009, 01:06 PM
I have another football question for ya.... fair or not should Michigan fire Rich Rodriguez right now after just two years and grab Jim Harbaugh?

I'm not sure that chasing the coaching flavor of the day makes sense. Of course, I'm not sure RR was the right fit for Michigan in the first place. I'd be inclined, though, to stand pat for the moment... if his recruiting is good. Is it?

I'm not at all confident that Harbaugh would make that jump anyway. The place he's at is a classy joint, with a rising program, in a premier conference. Would he leave that for Michigan? Michigan has one of the most storied histories in college football. But, at the moment, they're a program in decline, in a conference that's slipping, in a region that's moribund. Hmmmm... hard choice. I think if I were Harbaugh, though, I'd stand pat also.

Paul Pless
11-22-2009, 01:22 PM
I'd be inclined, though, to stand pat for the moment... As a lifelong Buckeye fan, I'm happy with Rich Rodriguez staying at Michigan.:p

Intertesting though... living here in Hell, which is only about 20 miles from the Big House, that the dominate topic on sports radio this fall has been whether or not Michigan should fire Rodriguez. Another interesting thing here on sports radio is that noone ever call in to talk about the Lions.:eek:

Beowolf
11-22-2009, 06:26 PM
Michigan will most likely hang on to RichRod for at least another year, if for no other reason than the fact that they don't want to

a) Pay two head coaches simultaneously while only one is on the sideline. (Although it looks like ND will be paying three!)

b) Let it be known that MSU has once again done a better job in the coaching hunt.

And even if they did let him go, there's no way that Harbaugh going ot leave Stanford. He's got way too good a thing going there.

Paul Pless
11-22-2009, 06:32 PM
Auburn currently has four head football coaches on their payroll.... ya think somebody knows some secrets???

bamamick
11-22-2009, 08:09 PM
The SEC by nature, but I really only follow Alabama and don't think about it much until we are ready to play these other teams.

I was interested to hear this espn talking head say yesterday that the Pac10 was the toughest league because there were so many good teams, and that the SEC had only two good teams and a bunch of mediocre teams. That's one of the most subjective things I have heard one of those guys say. His opinion, and he is getting paid to say it, but one of his points was that the Pac10 had 7 teams eligible for bowls this year. I have news for him: the SEC has 10 teams eligible. 10 of 12. I think the ACC has 7 or 8. I don't pay any attention to the Big10 but I am sure it's the same.

Pretty interesting statement.

jmo Mickey Lake

bamamick
11-22-2009, 08:28 PM
Oh, I forgot to address the RichRod thing. Paul remembers but most of you won't recall that Rodriguez accepted the Alabama job in principal but then turned us down.

Our AD (Coach Mal Moore, he of the six national championship rings) wanted us to pursue Nick Saban but certain members of the BOT balked at: the fact that he was still in the NFL and getting him to Alabama would be tricky, AND, the price. Alabama has traditionally not paid much for our coaches. We make a lot of money, but spending it has not been something we've done much of. That's changed now, even with the hiring of basketball coach Anthony Grant.

Anyway, RichRod was all ready to be announced when some redneck said that his wife looked like a stripper or something like that on the Paul Finebaum radio show (syndicated and broadcast around the south. Sports Illustrated listed Finebaum as one of the most influential people in sports radio), that set off a whole firestorm of discussion that turned ugly, and Rodriguez decided to turn us down. About a month later Saban came on board and almost every day someone posts a letter of thanks to Rita Rodriguez for the fact that she didn't like Tuscaloosa (the reason that was given to us for him not coming).

When Nick Saban came to Alabama the biggest difference in what he wanted to do was that we switched from a 4-3 to a 3-4 flex defense. The offense we left pretty much the same, and the players recruited to play those positions had minor adjustments to make to be successful. In the last five years Alabama has gone 10-3, 6-7, 7-6 (Saban's first year), 12-2, and now 11-0. It's not like we were terrible, we were just not very deep.

What Rodriguez did was change everything about Michigan and it hasn't worked. The only people who can make the decision on whether or not he stays are those closest to the program because only they know if progress is being made. With the changes that they made it was always going to take time, and one thing that I don't ever remember WVU being famous for is recruiting. To be very successful you have to recruit like crazy. Most of the guys WVU recruited from down here (Pat White went to high school with two of my kids) were middle of the road guys. I don't know if RichRod is a great recruiter or not.

imo, if the internal systems within the program are working and you see stuff like S&C improving then you give the guy time. If you don't see progress then you cut him loose, providing you have a quality replacement. It isn't as easy to find someone as you'd think these days. Everyone assumes that Kelly from Cincinnati is going to Notre Dame, but you never know. He is already in a good spot (which I don't consider South Bend to be right now) and he can wait it out for a better job like Penn State?

All in all I can just say that I am so very glad that it's Michigan's problem and not Alabama's.

Mickey Lake

David G
11-22-2009, 08:51 PM
The SEC by nature, but I really only follow Alabama and don't think about it much until we are ready to play these other teams.

I was interested to hear this espn talking head say yesterday that the Pac10 was the toughest league because there were so many good teams, and that the SEC had only two good teams and a bunch of mediocre teams. That's one of the most subjective things I have heard one of those guys say. His opinion, and he is getting paid to say it, but one of his points was that the Pac10 had 7 teams eligible for bowls this year. I have news for him: the SEC has 10 teams eligible. 10 of 12. I think the ACC has 7 or 8. I don't pay any attention to the Big10 but I am sure it's the same.

Pretty interesting statement.

jmo Mickey Lake

Mickey,

A lot of the pundits have been making comments to the effect that the Pac-10 is the best conference. Now... while I'm a happy Pac-10 homer... I'm not I'd go that far. The fact that so many folks have been saying the same thing for a while now suggests that there's an argument to me made. I can imagine being convinced that it's true this year. However... until the Pac-10, or some other conference, compiles the sort of long-term performance that the SEC has... it'll have to be a year-by-year judgment (with the benefit of the doubt going to the SEC). It'd be interesting to see more direct matchups... but they don't seem to happen that often. IIRC, the Pac-10 has fared pretty well when they do happen.

David G
11-22-2009, 08:52 PM
The SEC by nature, but I really only follow Alabama and don't think about it much until we are ready to play these other teams.

I was interested to hear this espn talking head say yesterday that the Pac10 was the toughest league because there were so many good teams, and that the SEC had only two good teams and a bunch of mediocre teams. That's one of the most subjective things I have heard one of those guys say. His opinion, and he is getting paid to say it, but one of his points was that the Pac10 had 7 teams eligible for bowls this year. I have news for him: the SEC has 10 teams eligible. 10 of 12. I think the ACC has 7 or 8. I don't pay any attention to the Big10 but I am sure it's the same.

Pretty interesting statement.

jmo Mickey Lake

Mickey,

A lot of the pundits have been making comments to the effect that the Pac-10 is the best conference. Now... while I'm a happy Pac-10 homer... I'm not sure I'd go that far. The fact that so many folks have been saying the same thing for a while now suggests that there's an argument to me made. I can imagine being convinced that it's true this year. However... until the Pac-10, or some other conference, compiles the sort of long-term performance that the SEC has... it'll have to be a year-by-year judgment (with the benefit of the doubt going to the SEC). It'd be interesting to see more direct matchups... but they don't seem to happen that often. IIRC, the Pac-10 has fared pretty well when they do happen.

brad9798
11-22-2009, 09:01 PM
Oregon Ducks poised for Pac-10 title --


BOISE STATE should be poised for NATIONAL TITLE! ;)

OconeePirate
11-22-2009, 10:46 PM
ACC, Georgia Tech!

pefjr
11-22-2009, 11:11 PM
How do you spell College Football? ................S.E.C.

National Championship:.........Dec 5, 2009 Tide vs Gators

Everything else is wishful thinking.

David G
11-23-2009, 03:20 AM
jr. - I think Texas might have something to say about your scenario this year.

At any pass - you are an ignorant, provincial dinosaur... and should be pitied and forgiven for your handicaps (even if they are self-inflicted ;)).

The SEC has certainly played in a lot of national title games. They've got a long way to go before they match the Ivy League, however, with something like 55 championships won. Princeton alone has 24, and Yale 19 - totals unlikely ever to be matched by any other schools. I think the SEC has something like 32 so far, and the Pac-10 maybe half that.

Since the inception of the BCS system (1998) the SEC has done quite well. They've won 5 national championships; the Big12 has 2; while the Pac-10, Big 10, ACC, and Big East each have 1.

This is part of what the pundits are talking about. There's no disputing the the SEC plays some very good football. It is also becoming evident that they're quite adept at working the system so as to position their teams for success. Things like loading up on cupcakes in their non-conference schedules, and opting to avoid a round-robin schedule (and thereby avoid some bruising games which could be potential losses). Smart? You betcha. Apt to give a clear and accurate representation of who is actually the best team in college football? Not so much :rolleyes:

Playoffs anyone?

bamamick
11-23-2009, 08:29 AM
The last two games Alabama played against Pac10 teams they lost: to UCLA about ten years ago. This year Georgia beat Arizona State and LSU beat Washington, while UCLA beat Tennessee in K'ville.

One thing that I don't think people think about in regards to the SEC is what a massive hill-to-climb they have put in the way of their member schools when it comes to playing for the national championship.

Last year Bama went into the SECCG ranked #1 in the country but lost to Florida. Say it hadn't been Florida. Say that someone else had slipped in there that wasn't ranked highly enough to get to the final two simply by winning in Atlanta. The SEC would have been left out in the cold with an upset in Atlanta. It hasn't happened yet, but it will sooner or later. Pac10 and Big10 schools have no such problem.

The other thing is the sheer enormity of the task at hand. IF the Tide gets by Auburn on Friday we will be ranked either #1 or #2 (we are .005 points behind right now). Regardless, we will wind up playing either the 1st or 2nd ranked team in the country on December 5th, and then have to do the EXACT same thing in January! To do such a thing in a single season is almost unheard of, yet that's what Alabama and Florida are looking at right now. If that isn't enough to earn the respect of college football fans around the country then I just don't know what you'd have to do.

jmo Mickey Lake

pefjr
11-23-2009, 02:26 PM
jr. - I think Texas might have something to say about your scenario this year.

At any pass - you are an ignorant, provincial dinosaur... and should be pitied and forgiven for your handicaps (even if they are self-inflicted ;)).

The SEC has certainly played in a lot of national title games. They've got a long way to go before they match the Ivy League, however, with something like 55 championships won. Princeton alone has 24, and Yale 19 - totals unlikely ever to be matched by any other schools. I think the SEC has something like 32 so far, and the Pac-10 maybe half that.

Since the inception of the BCS system (1998) the SEC has done quite well. They've won 5 national championships; the Big12 has 2; while the Pac-10, Big 10, ACC, and Big East each have 1.

This is part of what the pundits are talking about. There's no disputing the the SEC plays some very good football. It is also becoming evident that they're quite adept at working the system so as to position their teams for success. Things like loading up on cupcakes in their non-conference schedules, and opting to avoid a round-robin schedule (and thereby avoid some bruising games which could be potential losses). Smart? You betcha. Apt to give a clear and accurate representation of who is actually the best team in college football? Not so much :rolleyes:

Playoffs anyone?

Can't post two in a row without name slingling? Gators have allowed 8 tds all season playing the top offenses in the country. Oregon allowed Stanford that many in one game. Course you gotta take off those green glasses to see some good football.

Do you know how to spell National Champion?

G.A.T.O.R.S.
:D

hokiefan
11-23-2009, 03:02 PM
Can't post two in a row without name slingling? Gators have allowed 8 tds all season playing the top offenses in the country. Oregon allowed Stanford that many in one game. Course you gotta take off those green glasses to see some good football.

Do you know how to spell National Champion?

G.A.T.O.R.S.
:D

My $1 says that this year the MNC winner starts with a B, as in Bama. You and I are even on our first two wagers, 1st on VT-Bama (ugh!!!), then double or nothing on VT-UM. Wanna make this a tiebreaker?

Cheers,

Bobby

David G
11-23-2009, 03:10 PM
Hey jr. - Are you saying that one of those characteristics (ignorant, provincial, dinosaur) does not accurately describe you? Which one (or more???) are you taking issue with? Or are you just objecting to my pointing out the obvious :p ?

I agree that the Gators have a decent chance at a nat. championship. Did I say differently? Your expressed level of certitude, however, only argues for the adjectives you are objecting to.

BTW - are you ever gonna address any of the substantive points raised... or just continue to shake your PomPoms & quibble about minutiae?

Or... if all that is too much... what do you think of Mr. Pless's notion of a boycott to force a playoff system? He started a thread on the topic. Jump on over and comment, if you've got any ideas on the subject.

pefjr
11-23-2009, 03:24 PM
My $1 says that this year the MNC winner starts with a B, as in Bama. You and I are even on our first two wagers, 1st on VT-Bama (ugh!!!), then double or nothing on VT-UM. Wanna make this a tiebreaker?

Cheers,

BobbyBad bet for you. You are saying Bama will win the next three games? I win if they do not? Clarify.

Curious, if VT were in the BCS would it be MNC?:)

hokiefan
11-23-2009, 04:15 PM
Bad bet for you. You are saying Bama will win the next three games? I win if they do not? Clarify.

Curious, if VT were in the BCS would it be MNC?:)

Actually, what I was thinking when I wrote that, but didn't say so clearly, was more like this. You pick the Gators, you win I give you a dollar. I pick the Crimson Tide, same deal the other way. Anyone else wins, then we both lose and no $ change hands.

On your second question, the answer is it depends. Had we beaten Bama, then run the table, then for sure we'd play for all the marbles. Our strength of schedule is top 10 at least, maybe top 5. Had we run the table after Bama, then I think we play the UF/Bama winner for the MNC. Had we lost to GT, then taken UNC we had a good shot at an at-large bid. Thing is, we didn't do any of those things, so now whats left is to smack the silly Hoos and get a good bowl game.

This season has been full of if only's, starting with being ahead against Bama going into the 4th quarter. Yeah, I know, we didn't look to impressive offensively that day, but special team points count just the same. Our star RB doesn't muff his one and only punt return and the outcome could have been different. Especially since his freshman replacement has turned into a stud punt returner. Lots of plays could have changed that game, but fact is they didn't. So now I'm a Bama fan in terms of the MNC. We had our chances against GT, and we had them against UNC. Can't get upset though, it's a game played by kids. Good entertainment.

Cheers,

Bobby

pefjr
11-23-2009, 04:40 PM
Actually, what I was thinking when I wrote that, but didn't say so clearly, was more like this. You pick the Gators, you win I give you a dollar. I pick the Crimson Tide, same deal the other way. Anyone else wins, then we both lose and no $ change hands.

On your second question, the answer is it depends. Had we beaten Bama, then run the table, then for sure we'd play for all the marbles. Our strength of schedule is top 10 at least, maybe top 5. Had we run the table after Bama, then I think we play the UF/Bama winner for the MNC. Had we lost to GT, then taken UNC we had a good shot at an at-large bid. Thing is, we didn't do any of those things, so now whats left is to smack the silly Hoos and get a good bowl game.

This season has been full of if only's, starting with being ahead against Bama going into the 4th quarter. Yeah, I know, we didn't look to impressive offensively that day, but special team points count just the same. Our star RB doesn't muff his one and only punt return and the outcome could have been different. Especially since his freshman replacement has turned into a stud punt returner. Lots of plays could have changed that game, but fact is they didn't. So now I'm a Bama fan in terms of the MNC. We had our chances against GT, and we had them against UNC. Can't get upset though, it's a game played by kids. Good entertainment.

Cheers,

Bobby
I will take the bet, and you made a wide circle around my question and did not answer it. Now, be honest, if VT won the NC, would it be Mythical?

Point: The stronger your team is , the weaker their schedule looks.

hokiefan
11-23-2009, 05:00 PM
I will take the bet, and you made a wide circle around my question and did not answer it. Now, be honest, if VT won the NC, would it be Mythical?

Point: The stronger your team is , the weaker their schedule looks.

1st thing, you're on.

2nd thing, I didn't answer your question because I missed what the real question was.

3rd, if VT won the game it would still be the MNC. I might not say that out loud to every single person I know, but thats the way I see it. Kind of like I won't admit to my GT engineer friends that GT is a top notch engineering school.

You're right about the perception of the schedule thing. A lot of people (Hokies in particular) couldn't believe that UNC was a strong team when we lost to them. Just took them awhile to get their stuff together this year. Right now they are playing pretty good ball. I can't complain about our performance this year. We've lost to #2, #7, and #23 according to the latest polls.

Cheers,

Bobby

pefjr
11-23-2009, 06:40 PM
1st thing, you're on.

2nd thing, I didn't answer your question because I missed what the real question was.

3rd, if VT won the game it would still be the MNC. I might not say that out loud to every single person I know, but thats the way I see it. Kind of like I won't admit to my GT engineer friends that GT is a top notch engineering school.

You're right about the perception of the schedule thing. A lot of people (Hokies in particular) couldn't believe that UNC was a strong team when we lost to them. Just took them awhile to get their stuff together this year. Right now they are playing pretty good ball. I can't complain about our performance this year. We've lost to #2, #7, and #23 according to the latest polls.

Cheers,

Bobby

I haven't ever been happy with College Football Ranking System but we all started the game with the same rules, someone has to win and many more have to lose. So there is always more complainers and only one happy winner. That why I like singles tennis, only one loser. In tennis, the best thing you can do is learn to lose. By that I mean if you want to play competitively, you are going to lose about half the time. Better know how to lose gracefully. To win the NC and to have the unhappy poopoo it, is just plain sore losers. I noticed after some games the players are walking around and congratulating the winners, this I like to see. Sometimes it's clear there is more good sportsmanship in College Football. The incident with the eye gouging, and some others have no place in this game. Personally I hope the Gators repeat, or Alabama takes it for no other reason than Historical Prestige. But I will not cry foul if Texas or any other team wins it. It's already been a great year in College Football no matter who wins.:)

bamamick
11-24-2009, 08:06 AM
I see UNC and Ole Miss about the same way. I think that both had some expectations coming into the year that got dashed pretty early on, and now that the season is ending it looks like both were pretty good teams who had some bad days.

In the NFL you can win 66% of your games and be considered a very good team. In college football if you lose two games you are an also ran. Yes, a playoff would go a long way towards fixing that, but would it really?

Jacksonville State University went 8-3 this year and will miss the IAA playoffs. No big deal, right? Two of their losses were to Georgia Tech and Florida State, and neither were blowouts, but they still counted and knocked them out it.

Mickey Lake

hokiefan
11-24-2009, 09:53 AM
I see UNC and Ole Miss about the same way. I think that both had some expectations coming into the year that got dashed pretty early on, and now that the season is ending it looks like both were pretty good teams who had some bad days.

In the NFL you can win 66% of your games and be considered a very good team. In college football if you lose two games you are an also ran. Yes, a playoff would go a long way towards fixing that, but would it really?

Jacksonville State University went 8-3 this year and will miss the IAA playoffs. No big deal, right? Two of their losses were to Georgia Tech and Florida State, and neither were blowouts, but they still counted and knocked them out it.

Mickey Lake

Thats one of the big differences a playoff makes. A playoff rewards the team that accomplishes two things. They play the regular season well enough to get in the playoff. And they are the team playing the best at tournament time. The current system in college football makes the regular season count more. If you want to win it all you better be playing well on opening day and have enough depth to cover injuries through the season. And with the yearly turnover with kids graduating, there is always a hole to fill on opening day. I see the desire for a playoff system, especially if you're a fan of a good team that isn't in a BCS conference, like TCU, Boise State, etc. But to me there is also something magic about the significance the current system gives the regular season.

Cheers,

Bobby

pefjr
11-24-2009, 01:03 PM
College Football Dynasties

1. Oklahoma 1953-58 Record: 60-3-1
The Sooners won 47 in a row, two national titles and defeated teams by an average of 28.6 points per game.

2. Notre Dame 1946-49 Record: 36-0-2
Frank Leahy's Fighting Irish won three national championships and never trailed over four years. The only blemishes are two ties with Army in '46 and USC in '48.

3. Army 1944-46 Record: 27-0-1
Doc Blanchard and Glenn Davis helped the Cadets capture two national titles. The defense wasn't bad, either, giving up an average of 5.8 points per game.

4. Nebraska 1993-95 Record: 36-1
An 18-16 loss to Florida State in the 1994 Orange Bowl kept the Cornhuskers from winning three titles in a row. Tommie Frazier and Co. scored 40 or more points 22 times.

5. Nebraska 1970-71 Record: 24-0-1
Johnny Rodgers led the Cornhuskers to two national titles. They won 23 games in a row, including the 35-31 victory over Oklahoma, considered the greatest college game ever played.

6. USC 2002-2006 Record: 56-5
Pete Carroll's Trojans included two national titles and three Heisman award winners.

7. Miami 1986-92 Record: 76-6
It began with Heisman winner Vinny Testaverde and ended with Heisman winner Gino Torretta. In between, the Hurricanes won three national championships and dominated college football.

8. Oklahoma 1973-75 Record: 32-1-1
Barry Switzer's crew won national titles in '74 and '75 and finished third in '73. The Sooners averaged 35.8 points per game and allowed 11.1.

9. Alabama 1964-66 Record: 30-2-1
The Crimson Tide captured national championships in '64 and '65 and finished third behind Notre Dame and Michigan State in '66 despite an 11-0 record.

10. Alabama 1977-79 Record: 34-2
National championships in '78 and '79 put the bow on Bear Bryant's career.

pefjr
11-24-2009, 01:16 PM
Do you know who created the Miami Dynasty? Most attribute the success to Schnellenberger, Johnson, and the Heisman Quarterbacks when it really was Sam Jankovich the Athletic Director. He came to UM in 1983 and convinced the University to make a commitment to a football team. You can see why the NE Patriots hired him away in 1991. Most football fans have never heard of Sam Jankovich.

bamamick
11-24-2009, 01:25 PM
I agree with that. Miami used to be on Bama's schedule when they were a struggling program, and some of the scores were pretty lopsided. They came a long way in a pretty short time.

Mickey Lake

pefjr
11-24-2009, 02:29 PM
Alabama has won most of the Miami games. I have been a Hurricane fan since a kid. The most memorable victory in my hard drive was I think 1965. Notre Dame was powerful and Miami had nothing. The game was expected to be a blow out ND victory and shoulda been. But that rivalry and home field advantage was overlooked and Miami came out with a win, sorta. It was a 0-0 tie. But for my Canes, that was the greatest victory.